It will require a long time for the public of Armenia, or at least a part of it, to realize that the most important thing in international relations is the state interest of the countries. “We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow.” This quote by the prominent British statesman and diplomat of the 19th century, Henry Palmerston, has not lost its relevance today.

During the Soviet years, the propaganda about the friendship of the peoples was very deep in the consciousness of the Armenians, introducing the slogan from which, contrary to Palmerston, one can come to the exact opposite conclusion, that is, there are perpetual enemies and eternal friends. However, after independence, the old slogans began to collapse, because Armenia is no longer a part of Russia or one of the republics of the Soviet Union, but an independent country with its own interests, which do not necessarily coincide with, say, the interests of Russia.

Ignorance of this simple truth leads to the distorted thinking we see in our political and public discourse today. Some are still of the opinion that Russia has special obligations to Armenia, even if they are contrary to Russia's interests, and according to the judgment of the other sector, since Russia moves in its own interests and ignores Armenia's interests, then it is our enemy, and our friend is Russia's competitor - the west.

People caught in such a mental trap repeat the same mistake, but with the opposite sign. Even now they think that the West is committed to protecting our interests, and overnight they become staunch Westerners. Thus, both pro-Westerners and pro-Russians think in the same schematic way, looking for a perpetual enemy and eternal ally. In fact, both of them are carriers of distorted thinking.

Added to all this is another flawed thinking that does not allow us to understand the nature of international relations. Pro-Westerners believe that there is one common West, which is now in conflict with Russia, and will fight against China in the next step. Meanwhile, that conventional West also consists of different countries, whose interests also do not coincide, leading to sharp contradictions and sometimes insurmountable interstate conflicts.

For example, Poland is the number one country that supports Ukraine, but would the Poles want to have as a neighbor a Ukraine that won the war against a powerful Russia, with a strong army, with whom they have a territorial dispute, or would their desired neighbor be a weakened Ukraine due to the war and an equally exhausted Russia? Definitely the latter. Next to any state, a stronger and more ambitious one is a constant threat. Another example. Have Britain and France, who are allies in the fight against Russia, put aside their centuries-old rivalry and given up their aspirations to establish their own influence in the South Caucasus? Of course not.

In terms of combining and contrasting interests, similar examples can be cited from the relations between Great Britain and Turkey, Azerbaijan and Iran, and other countries. And what is our main delusion? The logic of building international or interstate relations is always distorted among us because primitive, non-working schemes and wrong perceptions, and outdated ideas imposed by the political field and press around them are put as the basis.